Why Eliminating the NEA Would Be a Disaster For Our Country (Guest Column)

by

I hail from a family deeply connected to the artistic world. My grandmother, Enid Flender, transitioned from being a dancer to a public school teacher; my grandfather, Harold Flender, was a writer. Growing up, my mother, uncle, and brother, along with myself, were significantly influenced by our education in public schools that emphasized the performing arts. I spent my childhood at Manhattan Plaza, a government-assisted artists’ residence in New York City, and developed a deep affection for films at Anthology Film Archives in the East Village. It has been an immense privilege to live a life where creativity takes center stage.

Without the support of the National Endowment for the Arts, I’m not sure I would have chosen a career as an actor.

or

It was likely thanks to the National Endowment for the Arts that I opted for acting as my profession.

For the first time, I performed on stage with the National Dance Institute (NDI), a non-profit organization that receives funding directly from the NEA. Founded in 1976 by Jacques D’Amboise, a renowned dancer of the New York City Ballet, NDI offers dance lessons integrated into public elementary school curriculums and provides free summer programs. When I reminisce about my time with NDI, one particular memory stands out: a moment when a group of us gathered around a piano, tapping our hands to the song “Cement Mixer Putti-Putti” (being young). We struggled to find the rhythm, often falling slightly out of sync. To help us, the teacher instructed us to close our eyes. In just a few claps, we were all in perfect harmony, demonstrating the importance of focusing on what we heard and felt rather than observing others.

Upon obtaining it and opening our eyes, we were overjoyed. We had established a bond. Now, we could focus our efforts towards our shared objective: the show. I recall the pure elation of performing on stage following such arduous rehearsals – an emotion not unlike what some children express after months of practice in a sport.

As a gamer who was part of the NDI program, some friends pursued artistic careers, while many didn’t. Regardless of their chosen paths, those who branched out into other fields still looked back on our time there fondly because of the life lessons it taught us. Learning choreography instilled discipline in us, and mastering a new song gave us confidence. We learned resilience, adaptability, and the importance of teamwork – skills that are just as valuable for a lawyer, therapist, pastry chef, or even a space engineer. And hey, if there’s ever a movie about any of these characters, count me in! The NEA made it all happen.

Currently, federal support for the arts is under significant threat. The recent budget plan submitted by the White House to Congress suggests disbanding this group. Already, numerous theater companies and other art institutions have received notices that their funding has been withdrawn, causing a cloud of operational doubt. Their existence itself may be at risk.

I recently visited Capitol Hill with The Creative Coalition, a nonprofit arts organization, to voice my support for the NEA. I met with congressional staffers who were undecided about the worth of federal funding for the arts. It was an impactful encounter, discussing with these key figures and walking through the halls of our country‘s legislative buildings. Although it was enlightening, there was opposition as well. Some staffers expressed that taxpayers shouldn’t finance the arts. However, this meeting strengthened my conviction about the significance of arts funding. In truth, even the doubtful staffers could recall fond memories connected to the arts – a musical performance or play or dance classes they had attended. Essentially, the case for arts funding became self-evident to them: without government support, many children like them and those from similar economic backgrounds might have missed out on these experiences.

Government funding for the arts is frequently reduced as one of the initial cost-cutting measures; however, it should instead be preserved as vital and indispensable. Art fuels our sense of purpose, nurtures creativity, and drives human progress. The arts cultivate empathy, promote understanding, and strengthen connections among us. Engaging in creative expression – through dance, music, visual art, theater, or cinema – enables us to connect on a profound level and offers a pathway into the collective experience of what it truly means to be human.

The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) doesn’t require a significant financial investment from the United States. Only 0.004% of the country’s annual budget goes towards the NEA, whereas smaller countries like France, Germany, and the UK invest much more, around a billion dollars each annually. However, contrary to popular belief, this funding doesn’t just sit idle; it stimulates the economy. NEA grants, according to the Creative Coalition, have a strong multiplier effect. Each dollar awarded to an arts organization is estimated to generate approximately 9 dollars in private investment or consumer spending, turning the $207 million into roughly $2 billion. So, an NEA grant isn’t just free money; it serves as a seal of approval for a project that then attracts a significant amount of private funding.

Instead of grand productions like Hollywood films or Broadway plays, these projects are more akin to local jazz festivals, museum exhibitions, art classes, and community theater performances. They serve to enhance communities, foster cultural heritage, and boost local economies. These programs operate all year round, such as the Miami Lighthouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired, offering music education specifically designed for visually impaired individuals. Similarly, there’s Creative Forces, which focuses on arts programming tailored to active military members and veterans. There are hundreds more initiatives like these.

The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) plays a crucial role for small and rural arts groups that may struggle to secure funding from major donors or corporate sponsorships otherwise. Approximately 40% of NEA funding is channeled through state and local arts agencies, empowering communities to decide how these funds are allocated. In the absence of the NEA, large cities might continue their cultural flourishing, but I am concerned that rural and small-town art initiatives—ranging from Idaho’s arts education programs to Maine’s community theater projects—could cease to exist.

A large number of top officials at the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) have recently stepped down due to budget cuts, which is disheartening but doesn’t dampen my optimism. The U.S. Congress still holds significant influence over this situation, and we can make our voices heard by reaching out to them. Here’s a phone number you might find useful: 202-224-3121. This is the congressional switchboard, and I strongly encourage everyone to call their representatives to express support for the NEA. Over the years, I’ve learned that our elected officials pay close attention to public opinion, and these phone calls truly matter. It’s important to note that nearly every member of Congress has constituents who receive funding from the NEA. Now is the ideal time to let each of them know that we want the NEA to continue thriving.

Supporting the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) is crucial for children eager to master rhythm in music, visually impaired individuals yearning to play instruments, and veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan seeking healing through art. It’s essential we inform our elected officials about the people who depend on the NEA’s continued existence.

On our last evening in Washington D.C., during a charity dinner hosted by The Creative Coalition, some of my fellow delegates spontaneously broke into a musical performance right at the center of the gathering. Many Republican and Democratic staff members who we had interacted with earlier that day were present. Before long, everyone was joining in, either singing or dancing (or gently swaying!). As I scanned the room, it struck me: art serves as a bridge connecting us. It encourages us to enjoy each other’s company. To harmonize together. Art isn’t merely for our amusement – it unites us, shapes us, and provides us with the tools to envision what lies ahead.

Pauline Chalamet is an actor and producer living in Los Angeles.

Read More

2025-05-13 01:55